Will Democrats rush to their podiums to condemn Cohen for demonizing the opposition?

In an extraordinary outburst on the House floor, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) invoked the Holocaust to attack Republicans on health care and compared rhetoric on the issue to the work of infamous Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

“They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels,” Cohen said. “You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing. And Congressman Cohen didn’t stop there.

“The Germans said enough about the Jews and people believed it–believed it and you have the Holocaust. We heard on this floor, government takeover of health care. Politifact said the biggest lie of 2010 was a government takeover of health care because there is no government takeover,” Cohen said.

I won’t be holding my breath waiting for the recriminations from his fellow Democrats.

Their methods are crude, but effective.
Bcs we’ll always have morons around who swallow lies/propaganda hook, line, & sinker.

Badger40

yes, you’re correct, but that doesn’t excuse Cohen for replying to them in that unkind manner.

you can’t sink to the level of the people saying all that over-the-top nonsense about the law and compare their lies with those of Goebbels. You
have to repudiate them one by one if you can, while being prepared to own up in the many deficiencies in that mess that was passed.

In an extraordinary outburst on the House floor, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) invoked the Holocaust to attack Republicans on health care and compared rhetoric on the issue to the work of infamous Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

ABC News

Truth cutting both ways, Cohen just carved himself a new hole.

Compare Cohen’s rhetoric on the issue to the work of infamous Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

You know, I really am surprised that the Left decided to play this game… we all know they’re the ones who use the worst rhetoric and will never be able to live up to their new standards. Surely they know that posts like this one by Ed today are going to be a regular feature showing them for the hypocrites they are.

I just read a comment in World magazine by Mindy Belz referring to the murder of Pakistan’s Salman Taseer. (World magazine, January 29, 2011, pg 34) Although she was referring to Islamofascists, her comment applies just as correctly to the Left in this country.

“…”fascist[s]”…do not tolerate individual thought or expression, demand absolute adherence, and will impose it violently (and without regard to other laws) to make authoritarian government the rule.”

As usual, the Leftists in this country have once again displayed their hatred and ignorance.

I just read a comment in World magazine by Mindy Belz referring to the murder of Pakistan’s Salman Taseer. (World magazine, January 29, 2011, pg 34) Although she was referring to Islamofascists, her comment applies just as correctly to the Left in this country.

“…”fascist[s]“…do not tolerate individual thought or expression, demand absolute adherence, and will impose it violently (and without regard to other laws) to make authoritarian government the rule.”

As usual, the Leftists in this country have once again displayed their hatred and ignorance.

oldleprechaun

that’s a pretty damn ignorant and hateful comparison, old fella, but it’s also a dumb one.

Oh, silly goose, that tone thing and civility was just for the R’s. Most of us knew what Obama meant in his civility speech, especially when he gave it the day after personally calling to thank the Dup sheriff.

“The Germans said enough about the Jews and people believed it–believed it and you have the Holocaust. We heard on this floor, government takeover of health care. Politifact said the biggest lie of 2010 was a government takeover of health care because there is no government takeover,” Cohen said.

Isn’t “small-government Nazi” a contradiction in terms”? The Nazis were all about government handouts.

if you think that they consisted of government handouts in the main, maybe you know them but slenderly.

audiculous on January 20, 2011 at 11:27 AM

Unemployment insurance, national health care, high taxes on the rich in order to redistribute wealth — all in an effort to control, pacoify and to make dependent the lower middle class and working class. As I said, “state socialism”.

Unemployment insurance, national health care, high taxes on the rich in order to redistribute wealth — all in an effort to control, pacoify and to make dependent the lower middle class and working class. As I said, “state socialism”.
ddrintn

as I said, you know them but slenderly. the social welfare legislation was not the policy but an aspect of his policy of destroying the Socialists in Germany. The three bills were only a follow-up to the Anti-Socialist Law
enacted a few years before and which hadn’t broken support for socialism.

You were wrong to call the stuff “handouts”, that was not their character and redistribution of wealth to the middle class was neither their effect nor their aim.

The whole idea was to prevent socialism and Bismarch’s policies were hostile to socialism. You’re standing and staring at one tree and missing the forest.

The whole idea was to prevent socialism and Bismarch’s policies were hostile to socialism. You’re standing and staring at one tree and missing the forest.

audiculous on January 20, 2011 at 6:35 PM

The policies constituted state socialism. They also fostered the idea that opposition to the central government was immoral and unpatriotic. Sound familiar? The aim was to blunt the left by providing as much “bread and circuses” as the Social Democrats were promising. The ultimate aim of both was still control.

^ You know, it’s sort of like liberal Democrats rolling their eyes when they’re accused of being socialists. “We’re not anti-business or anti-private property; we just think the government needs a much larger role in guaranteeing a higher degree of equity in society.” So are Democrats Bismarckian? I might add that was pretty much the NASDP’s professed attitude as well, especially after the liquidation of the SA in 1934.

The policies constituted state socialism. They also fostered the idea that opposition to the central government was immoral and unpatriotic. Sound familiar? The aim was to blunt the left by providing as much “bread and circuses” as the Social Democrats were promising. The ultimate aim of both was still control.

ddrintn

If those three laws were the entirety of the policies implemented and the laws enacted, you might have a bit of a claim, but they were a small part. You’re ignoring the larger truth and distorting it.
The laws did not constitute state socialism.
Try reading them. The first one was hardly more than a reform of long practice.

As for the idea that they promoted opposition to the monarchy and it’s expansion by calling them unlawful and unpatriotic, I that outlawing the socialists is a fair sign that they were up to that.

And yeah, the object was control. Bismarck was trying to build up a German nation, and yeah, nations and aspiring nations seek control.
That’s part of the definition of governments and nations.

You’re confusing Bismarck’s three laws with many other social laws enacted after he was gone and both different from his and intended differently.

And none of it matched the methods and intentions of the Nazis. The f**** Nazis hated it all and tore it all apart.

The social policies instituted by Bismarck constituted state socialism. You just can’t get around it. I didn’t say he was a proto-Leninist.

As for the idea that they promoted opposition to the monarchy and it’s expansion by calling them unlawful and unpatriotic, I that outlawing the socialists is a fair sign that they were up to that.

No, they promoted devotion to the monarchy/central government. That was one of their purposes. To make an obedient flock of dependent sheeple.

And none of it matched the methods and intentions of the Nazis. The f**** Nazis hated it all and tore it all apart.

You can’t roll Bismarch into Hitler. They don’t match up.

audiculous on January 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM

See above. Public works and armament manufacture leading to employment along with a raft of social spending and programs such as “Strength Through Joy” kept the Germans thinking that Hitler was a messiah. The object of Bismarck, and of Hitler, was devotion to and dependence on the central government. And so I go back to Jonah Goldberg’s question, “If you leave out the parts about killing all the Jews and invading Poland, what specifically about the Nazi political platform do you disagree with?” The Nazis weren’t a bunch of nihilistic-but-laissez-faire types.